Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations declare destructiveHint false, which contradicts the description's explicit statement that this tool deletes products (DELETE /api/produtos/{id}) and marks it as [write, altera dados]. This is a direct contradiction, warranting the lowest score.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loading the resource and HTTP method with no filler. The bulk support note is relevant and efficiently communicated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With four parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It only addresses id and ids, omitting body and account, and does not describe return values, error cases, or side effects beyond deletion. The tool's destructive nature is the only behavior mentioned, but it is contradicted by annotations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'ids' for batched execution but leaves 'body' and 'account' entirely unexplained. The 'id' parameter is implied by the endpoint, but the other parameters lack any semantic context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description explicitly states 'Deletar' (delete) and the HTTP endpoint DELETE /api/produtos/{id}, making the resource (products) and action unambiguous. The endpoint path distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like gestaoclick_atributos_produtos_delete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only notes bulk support via 'ids', but there is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative tools. This leaves the agent without context for selecting this tool over others.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.